Thread: Good wide zooms for Gemini?

Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 13
  1. #1 Good wide zooms for Gemini? 
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,132
    I'm a big fan of the Sigma 18-35, but with it vignetting at 5K at the wide end - is there any EF zooms that don't?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #2  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,827
    Quote Originally Posted by BrandonChristensen View Post
    I'm a big fan of the Sigma 18-35, but with it vignetting at 5K at the wide end - is there any EF zooms that don't?
    Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III USM
    Tamron SP 15-30mm F/2.8 Di VC USD (Model A012) Canon
    Tokina AT-X 16-28 F2.8 PRO FX Canon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #3  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Las Vegas
    Posts
    1,132
    Oh nice, those all cover?

    That’s great.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #4  
    Quote Originally Posted by BrandonChristensen View Post
    Oh nice, those all cover?

    That’s great.
    I doubt any of them covers at the wide end.
    Björn Benckert
    Creative Lead & Founder Syndicate Entertainment AB
    +46855524900 www.syndicate.se/axis
    VFX / Flame / Motion capture / Monstro
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #5  
    The full frame wides cover thoughout their focal ranges. Also consider Canon 11-24, Sigma 14-24, Sigma 12-24 and Laowa 12mm. Just shot with the Canon 16-35 f4 and it looked great at 16mm. Watch out for super wides because it is hard to use front filtration.
    Mike McEntire
    Mack Dawg Productions
    Oceanside, CA
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2017
    Posts
    1,827
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    I doubt any of them covers at the wide end.
    43.3mm image circle worst case, Gemini is only 35.61 mm, so I think they will work.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #7  
    Senior Member Tommaso Alvisi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    ITALY
    Posts
    2,224
    Quote Originally Posted by Björn Benckert View Post
    I doubt any of them covers at the wide end.
    Why??? ;-) Of course they cover, these are all full frame zooms...
    TOMMASO ALVISI | tommasoalvisi.com
    Weapon 6K Carbon Fiber #1605 aka qp
    instagram | twitter
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #8  
    I hear your desire. However, it's hard to beat the Sigma at 1.8. I've found that playing just inside the vignette or even shooting at 4.5k is going to give you a better result with something you already have than getting into FF glass and shooting 5k at 2.8. Don't get me wrong, I have all the FF glass but there's nothing that really touches or surpasses that 18-35 but some primes. Sigma makes a 24-35mm f2 but I don't think it's worth it due to it's limited reach. There isn't any vignetting on the 18-35 in 5k ws. The Canon 24-70 or 24-105 would be the next FF most useful step up in my opinion. I just shot a thing in Kenya and I used the 18-35 for wide (24mm) wide open portrait style interviews and the 24-105 did most everything else handheld.
    Multiple hat wearing director and cinematographer based but not bound in the greater New York area.
    -
    GEMINI
    -
    Website: julienjarry.com
    Reel: http://julienjarry.com/reel
    Instagram: instagram.com/julienajarry/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by Julien Jarry View Post
    I hear your desire. However, it's hard to beat the Sigma at 1.8. I've found that playing just inside the vignette or even shooting at 4.5k is going to give you a better result with something you already have than getting into FF glass and shooting 5k at 2.8. Don't get me wrong, I have all the FF glass but there's nothing that really touches or surpasses that 18-35 but some primes. Sigma makes a 24-35mm f2 but I don't think it's worth it due to it's limited reach. There isn't any vignetting on the 18-35 in 5k ws. The Canon 24-70 or 24-105 would be the next FF most useful step up in my opinion. I just shot a thing in Kenya and I used the 18-35 for wide (24mm) wide open portrait style interviews and the 24-105 did most everything else handheld.
    If im not mistaken the Sigma 18-35 Art is designed for APS-C-format Canon EF-mount cameras
    Whereas the Sigma 18-35 Cine is designed for Super 35mm-sized sensors. Wouldn't that mean vignetting on the Art and no vignetting on the Cine?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #10  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    231
    If you can live without f1,8 have a closer look at the Sigma 14-24 2.8
    It has very little distortion and excellent sharpness. Only the fixed petal shaped hood is restricting mattebox use.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts